On 10/13/2008 10:04 PM, Jess Holle wrote: > Jess Holle wrote: >> Ruediger Pluem wrote: >>> So if noone finds a registry entry to stop this RFC violating behaviour >>> >> I'd love to see this solved by such a discovery, "option 0". >>> I see only two options on Windows: >>> >>> 1. Fiddle around with GetTcpTable. >>> >> I've attached my incomplete code in this regard (as a diff against >> 2.2.9, which is what I used as the base for my changes) for what >> they're worth. There are TO_DO notes where I know I'm missing stuff. >> I tested basic use of GetTcpTable(), which solved the problem, but >> haven't completed my conversion to caching this data -- in part >> because I don't know where to allocate an lock to arbitrate access to >> this cached data. > I forgot the -u on my diff. Here's a unified diff.
Thanks for this. Given that it introduces a lot of platform specific code to the proxy and given the outstanding cache problem I would like to wait for Bill's proposal to improve apr_socket_connect within APR as this looks more appealing overall. If improving APR turns out to be not possible I would come back to your patch. Regards Rüdiger
